d4T and 3TC Combination Studies Confirm the Effect of the Combination

A note from TheBody.com: The field of medicine is constantly evolving. As a result, parts of this article may be outdated. Please keep this in mind, and be sure to visit other parts of our site for more recent information!

Several papers at the 4th Retrovirus Conference presented data on the
antiviral efficacy of the combination of D4T and 3TC. These data were
anxiously awaited, since this regimen had become very widely used
before trials were available proving that it was effective.
Fortunately, we can now say that the combination appears to be very
active, particularly among patients who have never taken either drug.
Although direct well-controlled comparisons are limited, this
combination appears to compare favorably with AZT plus 3TC. Adding
D4T to patients who have already received AZT and 3TC however seems
to have only a modest effect.

Dr. Christine Katlama from the Hopital Pitie Salpetriere in Paris
presented a late breaker (Abstract LB4) on two pilot studies of D4T
plus 3TC (Altis 1 and Altis 2). Altis 1 involved antiviral naive
patients with a median CD4 count of 258 and median viral load at
baseline of 76,502 copies (about 4.8 log 10). The maximal viral load
response was about 2.0 log and at 24 weeks, there was a sustained
reduction of 1.66 log accompanied by a CD4 rise of about 100 cells.
In Altis 2, the patients were heavily pretreated with AZT, ddI , and
ddC, but had to be naive to d4T and 3TC. These patients had slightly
more advanced disease with baseline median CD4 count of 172 and median
viral load at baseline of 91,000 copies (about 4.9 log 10). The
responses to D4T plus 3TC were more modest in this group with a
maximal viral load decrease of 1.4 and CD4 increase of about 50
cells. By week 24, the viral load decrease was about 0.5 log below
baseline. Among the naive patients, 21% had undetectable viral loads
at week 24 (using the standard Amplicor assay). Toxicity was limited
and only 1 patient discontinued D4T due to neuropathy. These results
were quite comparable to results from the 4 pivotal trials for AZT
plus 3TC, presented as late breakers at this meeting 2 years ago.

A head to head comparison of AZT plus 3TC with D4T plus 3TC focusing
on the antiviral effect and drug levels in the cerebrospinal fluid
was reported in another late breaker presented by Dr. Foudraine from
the University of Amsterdam (Abstract LB5). They randomized 31 drug
naive patients to begin either D4T plus 3TC or AZT plus 3TC and
performed lumbar punctures at baseline and at week 12. The change in
plasma viral load in both groups was identical. Fifteen patients had
lumbar punctures; all had detectable virus in their CSF at baseline.
By week 12, all had undetectable viral RNA and negative cultures.
Drug levels in the CSF were 41, 56, and 67ng/mL for AZT, D4T, and 3TC
respectively. Absolute drug levels in the CSF relative to the
concentration needed for antiviral activity may be more telling than
blood to CSF ratios, which are commonly reported. When one drug has
rapidly changing blood levels over the dosing interval (as in the
case of AZT) the reported ratio may be very dependent on the timing
of specimens. The Amsterdam group speculated that both D4T plus 3TC
and AZT plus 3TC would be expected to protect against HIV-related
dementia. The effects of protease inhibitors on CSF viremia are less
clear, and one consideration in the design of triple combination
regimens may be the inclusion of drugs with good activity in this
compartment

Several posters also confirmed the activity of D4T plus 3TC. A pilot
open label trial of 41 patients performed in at the BC Center for
Excellence in Vancouver yielded similar results (Abstract #557).
Importantly, viral load reductions were greatest among those who had
not received either drug and were least among patients who had been
treated with 3TC. Cal Cohen from Community Research Initiative of
New England presented a retrospective study of 330 patients (abstract
# 556). The median initial viral load response was 1.1 log, and as in
the Vancouver study, patients who had already received AZT and 3TC had
a significantly reduced response.

Advertisement

Each of these studies has at least one major limitation, including
small sample size, lack of randomization, lack of concurrent
controls, or retrospective data collection, but taken together they
paint a consistent picture.

A note from TheBody.com: The field of medicine is constantly evolving. As a result, parts of this article may be outdated. Please keep this in mind, and be sure to visit other parts of our site for more recent information!

The Body is a service of Remedy Health Media, LLC, 750 3rd Avenue, 6th Floor, New York, NY 10017. The Body and its logos are trademarks of Remedy Health Media, LLC, and its subsidiaries, which owns the copyright of The Body's homepage, topic pages, page designs and HTML code. General Disclaimer: The Body is designed for educational purposes only and is not engaged in rendering medical advice or professional services. The information provided through The Body should not be used for diagnosing or treating a health problem or a disease. It is not a substitute for professional care. If you have or suspect you may have a health problem, consult your health care provider.